Tuesday, June 12, 2012

Cosmocking: June '12!

[This time I have a really good excuse for not posting! Namely that I was very busy lying in the sun by the shore of a beautiful lake in the woods, and one simply cannot blog when one is vacationing that hard. And before that I helped Rowdy move into and paint a new apartment. So. Been busy. But also been a bad, bad blogger. I have a lot to say by now so I'll try to get back on track.]

Orange cover! Demi Lovato! Wearing an always-fashionable Zippered Cutout Unitard/Dress/Swimsuit... Object! Her interview is about her struggle with eating disorders, which makes it totally appropriate and respectful that Cosmo has Photoshopped her to be skinnier! "A Bonus Section So Hot, They Made Us Seal It"! Who exactly is "they"? There's no central magazine censorship organization! Some retailers might reject certain content, but if they rejected explicit sex discussion I'm pretty sure they wouldn't carry any issues of Cosmo! It's almost like this is a goofily dishonest gimmick!

But maybe there's something super scandalous in there, right? So let's rip off the little seal on the "A Guide To His Package" section, and we get...

Guys have strong feelings when it comes to what you call their junk, and they tend to fall into one of two categories: They either like the word that rhymes with stick... or the one that rhymes with sock.

Oh for fuck's sake. This super duper secret sexymicious section can't even say "dick." (And no, of course, there are no pictures of any interest. There's a picture of a Sharpie marker, though, along with a claim it represents the size of the average erect penis. I hope they mean lengthwise.) I know this magazine is largely aimed at teenagers--which makes their terrible view of relationships more harmful, not less--but I'm guessing they don't go to a public high school if they're shocked by words that rhyme with bad words.

Men feel about their penises, I imagine, the same way you feel about your breasts.

No, actually, I have this thing called a vagina, thanks.

Breasts are important erogenous zones for lots of people (including me!), but equating breasts with penises is depressingly common, and seems to stem from two wrong-headed ideas:

1) Things that stick out are the important bits! Vaginas are all hidden away and mysterious, and thus couldn't possibly be an important part of a person's sensuality or body image.
2) The stereotypical heterosexual man finds breasts more attractive than vaginas. Therefore, women must find their own breasts absolutely fascinating.

Kinky sex is being sensationalized right now, but there's nothing new about dominant/submissive scenarios in women's fiction or in real-life women's fantasies. Here's why: Submission is a primal urge, likely linked to our need to function in groups. It helps us accept authority. However, we also possess instinctive dominant urges, which allow us to take leadership roles.

And that's why every woman on Earth is a BDSM switch!

...Wait, no.

Also: SEX. This stuff is (largely) about SEX. It is not just about how I want a man to boss me around. It is about how I want a SEXY man to boss me around in a SEXY way because that will stimulate me SEXUALLY. Don't subtract that from the equation. "I want to be sexually submissive because that's my fetish" is a very very different thing from "I want to be submissive because I don't like making decisions or having power."

Sexy: Skating with your pup [picture of a man on a skateboard walking a dog]

Skanky: Showing your pups while walking your dogs [picture of a woman with large breasts wearing a tank top and walking two dogs]

They're not removable, Cosmo. Maybe she would've very much liked to leave her breasts at home when she walked her dogs, but, y'know, not really an option for most people.

It's bad enough to declare behavior "skanky," but saying someone's body (and, I guess, the fact that she dressed in a way that made her body visible) is skanky--that's fucking... skeevy.

Let him initiate [asking you for your number]--it makes him feel manly to be the one picking you up. But make it easy for him by giving a few hints that you'd willingly offer up your digits. [...] If you're chatting about, say, bowling, tell him, "I love to bowl, but none of my friends ever want to go."

Here's the problem with this:
She: "I love to bowl, but none of my friends ever want to go."
He: "Gosh, that sucks. I hope you find some good bowling buddies!"
She: Thinks he's just given her a stinging rejection.
He: Not knowing that he was playing a secret game all along, thinks he's just politely expressed sympathy that she can't pursue her interest in bowling.

I did that for a while. It sucked. Now I (try to) do this:
She: "I love to bowl, but none of my friends ever want to go. Hey, maybe we could go bowling sometime?"
He: "YOU BRAZEN HUSSY, YOU HAVE DESTROYED MY MANHOOD! NOW I HAVE TO BE A WOMAN! THAT'S VERY INCONVENIENT!"

Why He Should Love You This Much More Than You Love Him

This is a big article on finding your "10% guy", the idea being that you should choose a guy who likes you 10% more than you like him, so you'll have all the power in the relationship. So that's kind of creepy. But it goes from creepy to sad when all the examples sound less like a guy who's smitten with you, and more like a guy who cares about you at all. He calls when he says he'll call? He doesn't play games with your affection? He treats you like he likes you?

That's not a 10% guy. That's a >0% guy.

The article's also full of "this will be hard for you because you're not hard-wired to like Nice Guys" bullshit about how women are naturally programmed to go for guys who don't give a shit about us, but we need to break that programming! Oh for fuck's sake. I don't even want to deal with this bullshit.

If something makes a man feel insulted, controlled, criticized, or backed into a corner, it shifts him into thinking emotionally, which isn't his strong suit--data transmits less quickly between the right and left hemispheres of the male brain, making it harder for men to process reason and emotion simultaneously.

...And that's why men can't move their left and right hands at the same time!

No, ha ha, of course I'm only kidding by implying that "brain hemispheres" are actual body parts with non-fuzzy-wuzzy functions. Really, that's why you should never subject a man to anything so cruel as disagreement or boundaries.

I think I've figured out the Cosmo view of masculinity: Masculinity means being strong and resilient, but men's sense of their own masculinity is weak and fragile! So it's women's job to carefully coddle and prop up men's feeling of strongness at all times. Women's reward for going along with this charade is... er... um... I'll get back to you on that.

Invite your best girls over for a music video-worthy carwash. Put on your sexiest cutoffs, grab some sudsy water, and give your wheels a washing.

"Hey ladies, want to come over and wash my car for free? It'll be a blast!"

Nice scam if you can make it work, I guess? I don't know why it has to be sexy carwashing, though. I think this is like the breast thing, where guys assume that if it's hot to look at a woman washing a car in skimpy clothes, it must be hot to be a woman washing a car in skimpy clothes. They never seem to understand that, you know, those girls in the music videos? They get paid for that.

About an hour before you get dressed, pop your panties in the freezer. Then slip them on just before you head out the door--you'll have the right kind of shivers in all the right places.

86 comments:

The "men are fascinated with breasts so women must be too" thing is unfortunately so common w/ the way people view people they objectify. >_<

For me, it's when guys hit on me and constantly talk to me about Asian stuff... like because they find me being Asian to be interesting, *I* must find myself being Asian to be interesting. Esp when they open with it as if it's like talking about my shoes or hair or something, except, y'know... not. >_>

Cliff - Just two weeks ago, I had to stop my friend's daughter and niece from getting someone's pharoah hound to pull them down the street on a skateboard. Considering that that dog can keep up on road biking day trips without even breaking a sweat... well...

My brother actually did get the neighbor's spaniel to pull him down the street on a skateboard, but he was imitating something he saw on "The Dog Whisperer" for the purpose of tiring the dog out. Worked well for making the dog (whose owner was elderly) easier to handle, but I don't know what about that could possibly be construed as "sexy."

whatever, the freezer panties thing is a fucking GREAT idea - pop 'em in the freezer before raunchy sex that destroys my vagina, put 'em on afterwards to cool down faster for round two. my previous strategy has been "point fan at vagina for two seconds until girlfriend starts whining that she's too warm", which is obviously far less effective. :D

Not to be the classiest person on here buttta handle of vodka or something that's been in the freezer is amaaazing for after sex soreness. it's not too cold for your thighs and such, and the shape is nice.

The super secret sealed section was particularly weak. I'm not sure why Cosmo found it necessary to include a guy's love ode to his penis. Here's a thought--why not have a woman talk about why she loves her vagina? That's much more of a taboo topic that deserves discussion. The author talks about how women purportedly have deeper orgasms than men, but this can't possibly be true! Please...

"I think I've figured out the Cosmo view of masculinity: Masculinity means being strong and resilient, but men's sense of their own masculinity is weak and fragile! So it's women's job to carefully coddle and prop up men's feeling of strongness at all times. Women's reward for going along with this charade is... er... um... I'll get back to you on that."

A boyfriend, silly.

Which makes me wonder something. How much of the advice in these articles has been tested (ideally against a control, since the current cultural climate tells guys that they're supposed to deal with bizarre, arbitrary tests), vs. how much is as accurate as a Penthouse forum letter.

If anybody's ever tried it, I'd love to see a take on picking up dudes for Science.

Penthouse and Cosmo are two sides of the sexism coin. One is about how Men Want Pretty Much Nothing But Raunchy Sex, the other is about how Women Want To Be In A Relationship. Neither one has any actual, useful advice.

Cliff: I dunno. it's always possible that a bunch of girls went out to pick up some guys, with some of them using straightforwards communication and the others playing head games, and then came back and compared notes.

Which was the idea I was trying to put out there. Field testing some of these rules sounds like it would make for a fun read.

I'd be less interested in the number of guys picked up by each method than the type.

It's probably that headgames are more appealing to a certain sort of man, but I suspect it's not the sort you'd then go on to have an open, honest, headgame-free relationship with.

(I feel sort of gross talking about "types" of man? Obviously an individual can change their beliefs regarding open communication versus "it's so sexy and feminine when no one knows what the fuck you want." But I think you know what I mean.)

I'll chime in with some anecdotal evidence here, Cliff-a very good male friend of mine says he enjoys the uncertainty that comes along with the headgames involved in expressing interest in someone. On the other hand, he's an open, honest, headgame-free person. So for him it's just courtship that involves headgames, I guess. I don't know how he makes sure that the other person is playing while being courted but honest and open otherwise; I suppose he'd say it's a risk he's willing to take?

Jan - I'm okay with the uncertainty of "does this person like me or not?"

I'm not okay with the uncertainty of "does this person actually know we're flirting or not?" At best, that sets you up for a whole lot of unnecessary disappointment; at worst, it becomes cruel and manipulative towards people who didn't even know they were playing your damn game.

I have a hard time saying "pussy" in a way that sounds sexy, or even natural. And any other word for it sounds even worse. (This is a judgment on my voice, accent, and manner of speaking, not on the words in question.)

(And no, of course, there are no pictures of any interest. There's a picture of a Sharpie marker, though, along with a claim it represents the size of the average erect penis. I hope they mean lengthwise.)

I feel so well-hung now!

But it goes from creepy to sad when all the examples sound less like a guy who's smitten with you, and more like a guy who cares about you at all. He calls when he says he'll call? He doesn't play games with your affection? He treats you like he likes you?

That's not a 10% guy. That's a >0% guy.

One thing that helped me have relationships was realizing that if I indicate in some way I like her, that doesn't mean I lost.

Also, in this weather putting my underwear in the freezer doesn't sound like all that bad an idea.

Oh definitely! I think many people confuse this. I keep trying to explain to my friend that she's not in middle school anymore and no one will tease her mercilessly if she just tells a guy she thinks he's cute, or she misses him or she enjoys spending time with him. Instead, she asks him for favors and assumes that he should be able to tell she likes him, when, in reality, it just makes her look like a moocher.

There's a guy I've been hooking up with on an intermittent basis for a while now, and I'm still fighting the terror that he'll figure out that I really like him. It's madly relaxing to just accept that *he knows*, but it still feels like surrendering to helplessness -- I'm no longer in complete control of the situation, and may be revealed to be a fool.

My first thought too, but then I just assumed that Cosmo doesn't think women have jobs, but rather spend our days looking at strange men playing sports and trying to convey our wants and needs through strange body language.

I've taken gods only know how many women's studies courses (now gender studies, but in the middle ages, aka early 2000s, we still called them women's studies), and not one of them has ever come close to Cosmocking.

A sharpie? Wow, Cosmo must know some of us menz are reading it (or at least reading the Cosmocking version of it). I think they're trying to make us feel good or something. Hey thanks Cosmo! For that, as well as all your unintentional hilarity. (or are they just being sardonic at this point?)

This Cosmocking felt a lot more...mature, I guess. All the other ones I've read, which covers about the last year and a half, were a bit more lighthearted and silly, and this one was genuinely resentful and upset, tonally, in parts.

I also think the comparison stems at least in part from women obsessing about boob size and men obsessing about cock size. But I think it might be worse for guys. I mean, boobs are just supposed to turn men on, so a women with small boobs might worry that she doesn't LOOK sexy enough. But cocks are supposed to FEEL good as well, so a guy with a small cock might worry that he can't pleasure his girlfriend the way he's "supposed" to. It seems to me that the latter worry would feel worse.

(I can't really offer any insights here based on personal experience, since I used to be pretty hour-glass-shaped, but eventually exercised myself to a more flat-chested, big-shouldered and altogether androgynous look since I feel more at home in a more androgynous body... So this is all just speculation on my part, on how more typical women as well as men might feel about their bodies.)

I'd pretty much figured it was based on size too. But also shape. I mean, look at the sharpie comparison, it's a little weird to worry only about the length of a penis, if not also the girth, the straightness/slight curve to it and everything else. considering all the shapes breasts seem to take, compared with say, the overtly fake, scarily solid and peculiarly spherical implants that still tend to dominate national media, it doesn't seem too out of place for (cis) women to worry about their breasts in a similar manner to (cis)men and their penis.

Interesting tidbit: I've met more people in my life that were distressed about their penis being too big than too small. Mostly with the reasoning that a 'too small' penis simply leaves something to be desired for the penetrated party, but a 'too big' penis hurts the penetrated party.

Then again, maybe it has something to do with knowing a lot of people with penises who're into anal sex...

So... wait. Cosmo just said that 'showing your pups' while jogging is skanky... but wearing cutoffs (And I'm assuming, white T-shirts/tanks, since its supposed to be a 'music video carwash') is... not?

Oops. There I go again... trying to use logic when dealing with Cosmo. Silly me.

Re: the car wash, washing your car takes about half an hour (more if you're doing fancy car things, I guess, but just 'making the outside clean', yeah, half an hour). Inviting a whole group of friends over for something which will, as a result of the numbers, take less than ten minutes seems... more hassle than that lost twenty minutes. Especially if you factor in everyone else's time in selecting tiny shorts, getting to your house, etc.

Thirdly, I just wanted to say thank you for Cosmocking, because it's pretty much changed my life. And I know that's completely dramatic, but I never even knew... I never knew I was confused and sabotaging myself and hating myself (can you tell I'm pretty young?) and that it didn't even make a fuck of sense. I was so indoctrinated I couldn't see the what the fuckery for the sheeple. And this... it's just so much /better/. Relating to people as people. Openly. Being a people. So just... thank you.

Maybe I buy the wrong kind of sharpies, but the one I just measured was a little under five and a half inches long, which is consistent with wikipedia's claims that the average erect human penis is between 5 and 6 inches long. Or was this a joke about girth? I'm so confused...

What was the car wash supposed to be for? I assumed (I was activating prior knowledge of Cosmo in context, as a consultant might put it) that they were suggesting that you do the sexy carwash as a performance for your boyfriends/husbands.

The Cosmocking response made me think maybe they were suggesting you just do it because it would be a fun afternoon. That does seem odd.

I care enough to ask for clarification, just not enough to check Cosmo.

I had a boyfriend once who loved me more than I loved him. We sort of accidentily became a couple after a one-night-stand. I just went along with it (I was young and stupid and didn't really know how to handle the situation when this guy, who I thought was a one-night-thing, suddenly was SO in love). And you know, that was total crap. Eventually I did the right thing and broke up.

If you've never had the opportunity to reject guys it seems like rejecting guys would be a super-cool experience that proves your popular. If you never had a guy loving you more than you love him this might also seem super-cool and proof that you're desirable. I used to fantasize about situations like this back when I was completely unpopular, so I know. But once you're actually in that situation, once you actually have a guy who loves you more than you love him or when you actually have to reject somebody, it's NOT FUN. You're gonna hurt people's feelings, and hurting people's feelings is NOT FUN.

A bit of imbalance is common: you're both in love but s/he feels it a bit more than you do, or you want to spend a little more time together than s/he does. But those degrees of difference are one thing: it's not the sort of thing you're talking about here. And it sounds as though Cosmo is advocating that sort of significant imbalance, not just saying "if your choice is someone who loves you a bit more or a bit less than you do, look for the one who loves you more."

I suppose that's inevitable if they define treating you as well as they'd treat a same-sex friend as evidence of caring 10% more. (

I have a greater advantage over Friend B, so I am going to ask him out. No wait, being asked out will make him feel less manly. There's nothing dudes hate more than girls liking them and saying so! Time for some head games, perhaps?

The other thing is that with this "10%" thing a girl may feel obligated to stay with a guy simply because he apparently loves her more, when she may not feel so committed. If I was a teenager following Cosmo's advice I'd be dating this friend of mine who I'm not that interested in because he asked me and he "loves" me a lot more than I do him, in comparison to the smaller difference in affection between myself and the guy I actually like. At least two people would be unhappy with this arrangement and it sort of promotes the idea that a girl should settle for what she can easily get.

The worst part is that I still want to know what "Cosmo's weird little love rule" is. Some 13-year-old part of me is convinced that somehow I'll find the key that's the answer to unlocking the mystery of love.

That's despite knowing it'll be something stupid. On reflection, maybe it was the 10% business? Which would make sense, because it was stupid.

So, you're supposed to find a guy who likes you more than you like him? Does Cosmo not realise that is an incredibly awkward place for a relationship to be in??? It has nothing to do with expecting someone you are dating to actually be nice to you.

Heh. The main way I feel about my breasts is "seriously, people, it's really not a problem when I whip 'em out in public, get over it", because I'm breastfeeding...

Also, I love the idea of getting a bunch of friends together and all washing our cars, because we could leave some people watching all the kids, and we could pick the house with the most convenient driveway/hose situation, but I'm sure we wouldn't do it in cutoffs. Denim takes way too long to dry.

WTF? I don't submit to anyone yet I have no problem with functioning in groups - I'm not hierarchal at all but I'm very social. Actually my anarchism makes me more popular because I stand up for myself but never try to control other people (neither doormat nor dictator, for there is no higher authority than oneself). Obviously I don't have dominant urges either... Australian cosmopolitan magazine has this evo psych bullshit too, and yes it is bullshit because even if we did have genes for behaviours, neuroplasticity overwrites it easier than a lot of people think (Actual Science'd!)

If it makes you feel any better, as far as breasts are concerned, better to err on the side of "too" small. I had A cups until I was 19, and then they suddenly ballooned up to DDs (I was one of those late bloomers who remains gawky and underweight until puberty is done, and then BANG! gains all the "womanly" curves (almost 30lbs worth) all at once) by the time I hit 25. Basically, I went from Lisbeth Salander to Joan Holloway in like 5 years. And it is stupid. Like 1% of clothes actually fit me, are at all my style, and look flattering (and also work appropriate) and I can't go anywhere without somebody commenting on my body, no matter what I'm wearing. Even finding undergarments is an adventure (also, much more expensive to be an odd size that's rarely stocked, especially in workout clothes. S/M/L doesn't work at all when your rib cage is an S but the girls are an XL). I miss being androgenous. :(

I've done that too. :/ I used to have a male friend who would constantly make fun of me for having small breasts, and eventually I got fed up with it and was finally like, "Would you like me to make fun of you for having a small penis? No? Then shut up." It did work in terms of getting him to knock it off at least, but now I'm worried I accidentally encouraged the breasts=penis assumption.

On a similar note, I have a female friend who often teases me about my small breasts. I commented on this to my boyfriend and replied with something along the lines of "And this is why I will never understand girls. I don't go mocking [his roommate] about his penis size."

So I read Cosmocking out loud to my wife (like you do) and she made a couple of points I think may be relevant to your interests.

Point the First:If you have to maintain a power differential by maintaining a love differential of 10%, and the way to know that he loves you 10% more than you love him is that he calls when he says he will, treats you like he likes you, and "doesn't play games with your affections," then doesn't that imply that you can actually be with whoever you want as long as you don't keep your word, don't treat him like you like him, and make sure to play games with his affections? After all, what's important is that he loves you 10% more, but that means you'd get the same result if you love him 10% less, right? That's SCIENCE.

Point the Second:Why is it skanky to wear a tank top to walk your dog, but not skanky to wear cutoffs and soapy water to wash your car while pretending to be in a music video with five of your closest and/or hottest girlfriends?

Why is it skanky to wear a tank top to walk your dog, but not skanky to wear cutoffs and soapy water to wash your car while pretending to be in a music video with five of your closest and/or hottest girlfriends?

Because the music video is for some (albeit unspecified) guy's benefit, whereas walking the dog might be, gods forbid, all about you and your dog! Obviously we can't have that: it might imply that you, like, own your own body or something.

"Because it feels good to wear it" is not on Cosmo's Approved List of Reasons To Wear Something.

(My SO and I went shopping for lingerie last week, and sadly, "because it feels good to wear it" was not on the lingerie-makers' approved list either. Lots of iterations of what he dubbed the "barbed wire bikini bottom". Ugh.)

I think the "girls must love their breasts, too!" also ties in with "Well, don't girls LIKE getting cat-called? Doesn't it make them feel good?" I've even had girls say this to me. It assumes that women just going about their daily business are constantly occupied by how they look/the fact that they are sexy/etc.

I love your blog, and Cosmocking prompted me to buy a couple of issues of the magazine. My boyfriend and I have fun reading them together because they're so absurd, even though the Italian version is a bit less ridiculous. The silliest bits can mostly be classified as attempts at humour and there's a lot more fashion advice, but it's still pretty dumb. However I feel I owe Cosmo a little apology: in 100 degree weather wearing a wet t-shirt in bed is probably the only way to survive...A.

What`s really stupid about this is how often Cosmo wants to protect a guy`s ego. When I was single, I would have been thrilled to have a girl ask me out. It`s not emasculating in the least. Cosmo seems to think all men have these weak little egos that fall apart from the smallest bump. Any man who`s ego or sense of manhood is shattered from these tiny things really isn`t much of a man to begin with.